Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1: Step 1: the claim is directed to statuary category.
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim recites the following limitations:
estimating a treatment effect of a medical treatment by (mathematical function as disclosed in the specification par. 46):
determining a first subset of covariate vectors for patients who received the medical treatment, and a second subset of covariate vectors for patients who did not receive the medical treatment (mental process of evaluation),
obtain a first set of probabilities, wherein the neural network model when applied on a covariate vector, provides probabilities of the covariate vector falling in each response classes in the plurality of response classes associated with the covariate vector (mathematical function as disclosed in specification par. 43), and
calculating a normalized aggregation of the first set of probabilities to obtain the first normalize probability (mathematical function as disclosed in the specification par. 45),
calculating a normalized aggregation of the second set of probabilities to obtain the second normalize probability (mathematical function as disclosed in the specification par. 45), and
comparing, for one or more response classes, (i) the first normalized probability to (11) the second normalized probability; and (mathematical function as disclosed in the specification par. 46);
The claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2: The judicial exceptions are not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the following additional elements:
A non-transitory, computer-readable medium storing one or more instructions executable by a computer system to perform operations comprising (under step 2A, prong 2 and under 2B this is just application of a generic computer in a generic manner which is just applying the computer as a tool in a generic manner (MPEP2106.05)(f)):
receiving, from a database, a dataset comprising: a set of covariate vectors, each covariate vector including clinical covariates of a respective patient, and a set of response indicators, each response indicator being associated with a respective covariate vector, wherein response indicators of the set of response indicators vary over a range, wherein each range includes a plurality of response classes for the respective clinical covariate, each response class being a portion of the respective range; and (extra solution activity (2106.05(g)) under Step 2A prong 2 and under 2B well understood routine conventional activity of receiving and transmitting data (2106.05(d)(ii));
obtaining a first normalized probability by: applying a neural network model on the first subset of covariate vectors to (under step 2A, prong 2 and under 2B this is just application of a generic NN model which is just applying the NN model as a tool in a generic manner (MPEP2106.05)(f));
obtaining a second normalized probability by:
applying the neural network model on the second subset of covariate vectors to obtain a second set of probabilities (under step 2A, prong 2 and under 2B this is just application of a generic NN model which is just applying the NN model as a tool in a generic manner (MPEP2106.05)(f)).
Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B: As shown above, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The judicial exceptions are not integrated into a practical application.
The claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 2-6: Step 1: the claim is directed to statuary category.
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim recites the abstract idea of parent claim.
Step 2A Prong 2: The judicial exceptions are not integrated into a practical application.
The claim recites additional element(s):
However, the additional elements amounts to generally linking the abstract ideas to the technological environment or field of use as discussed in in MPEP 2106.05(h).
Step 2B: As shown above, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The judicial exceptions are not integrated into a practical application.
The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 7: Step 1: the claim is directed to statuary category.
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim recites the following limitations:
for each covariate vector:
obtaining n +1 predicted responses for the covariate vector (mathematical function as disclosed in specification par. 43),
for each response class, estimating an association probability indicating that the covariate vector is associated with the response class based on the n+1 predicted responses (mathematical function as disclosed in specification par. 43-46);
estimating a treatment effect of a medical treatment by: (mathematical function as disclosed in the specification par. 46)
determining a first subset of covariate vectors for patients who received the medical treatment, and a second subset of covariate vectors for patients who did not receive the medical treatment, and (mental process of evaluation);
comparing, for one or more response classes, (i) a first normalized aggregation of association probabilities for the first subset, to(ii) a second normalized aggregation of association probabilities of the second subset (mathematical function as disclosed in specification par. 46); and
The claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2: The judicial exceptions are not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the following additional elements:
A non-transitory, computer-readable medium storing one or more instructions executable by a computer system to perform operations comprising (under step 2A, prong 2 and under 2B this is just application of a generic computer in a generic manner which is just applying the computer as a tool in a generic manner (MPEP2106.05)(f)):
receiving, from a database, a first dataset comprising:
a set of covariate vectors, each covariate vector including clinical covariates of a respective patient, and
a set of response indicators, each response indicator being associated with a respective covariate vector, wherein response indicators of the set of response indicators vary over a range, wherein each range includes a plurality of response classes for the respective clinical covariate, each response class being a portion of the respective range; (extra solution activity (2106.05(g)) under Step 2A prong 2 and under 2B well understood routine conventional activity of receiving and transmitting data (2106.05(d)(ii));
each predicted response being obtained by applying a respective one of n+1 neural network models (NNMs) to the covariant vector, and (under step 2A, prong 2 and under 2B this is just application of a generic NN model which is just applying the NN model as a tool in a generic manner (MPEP2106.05)(f));
providing the estimated treatment effect for display on a graphical user interface of a computing device. (extra solution activity (2106.05(g)) under Step 2A prong 2 and under 2B well understood routine conventional activity of presenting offer and statistics(2106.05(d)(ii)).
Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B: As shown above, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The judicial exceptions are not integrated into a practical application.
The claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 8-12: Step 1: the claim is directed to statuary category.
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim recites the abstract idea of parent claim.
Step 2A Prong 2: The judicial exceptions are not integrated into a practical application.
The claim recites additional element(s):
However, the additional elements amounts to generally linking the abstract ideas to the technological environment or field of use as discussed in in MPEP 2106.05(h).
Step 2B: As shown above, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The judicial exceptions are not integrated into a practical application.
The claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 13-18 are method claims having similar limitation as claims 1-6 and are rejected under the same rationale.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11694773. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of anticipation/obviousness.
Application No. 18308526
Patent No. 11694773
13. A computer-implemented method executed by one or more processors, the method comprising:
receiving, from a database, a dataset comprising:a set of covariate vectors, each covariate vector including clinical covariates of a respective patient, and a set of response indicators, each response indicator being associated with a respective covariate vector, wherein response indicators of the set of response indicators vary over a range,
wherein each range includes a plurality of response classes for the respective clinical covariate, each response class being a portion of the respective range; and
estimating a treatment effect of a medical treatment by: determining a first subset of covariate vectors for patients who received the medical treatment, and a second subset of covariate vectors for patients who did not receive the medical treatment,
obtaining a first normalized probability by: applying a neural network model on the first subset of covariate vectors to obtain a first set of probabilities, wherein the neural network model when applied on a covariate vector, provides probabilities of the covariate vector falling in each response classes in the plurality of response classes associated with the covariate vector, and calculating a normalized aggregation of the first set of probabilities to obtain the first normalize probability, obtaining a second normalized probability by: applying the neural network model on the second subset of covariate vectors to obtain a second set of probabilities, and calculating a normalized aggregation of the second set of probabilities to obtain the second normalize probability, and comparing, for one or more response classes, (i) the first normalized probability to (ii) the second normalized probability; and
providing the estimated treatment effect for display on a graphical user interface of a computing device.
1. A computer-implemented method executed by one or more processors, the method comprising:
receiving, from a database, a dataset comprising: a set of covariate vectors, each covariate vector including clinical covariates of a respective patient, and a set of response indicators, each response indicator being associated with a respective covariate vector, wherein response indicators of the set of response indicators vary over a range;
receiving, from the database, multiple partitions on the range of the response indicators to define a plurality of response classes for the response indicator; converting each response indicator to a respective one-hot encoded vector based on response classes indicated by the multiple partitions;
training a neural network model based on each covariate vector and a respective one-hot encoded vector associated with the covariate vector; and
estimating a treatment effect of a medical treatment by: determining a first subset of covariate vectors for patients who received the medical treatment, and a second subset of covariate vectors for patients who did not receive the medical treatment, and
comparing, for one or more response classes, (i) a first probability to (ii) a second probability, the first probability being a normalized aggregation of respective probabilities that covariate vectors of the first subset of covariate vectors are associated with the one or more response classes, the second probability being a normalized aggregation of respective probabilities that covariate vectors of the second subset of covariate vectors are associated with the one or more response class, wherein the respective probabilities are calculated by using the trained neural network model; and
providing the estimated treatment effect for display on a graphical user interface of a computing device.
Claims 14-18 of application No. 18308526 correspond to claims 2-7 of Patent No. 11694773.
Claims 1-6 are non-transitory, computer-readable medium claims having similar limitation as claims 15-20 and are rejected under the same rationale.
Claims 7-12 are non-transitory, computer-readable medium claims having similar limitation as method claims 8-14 and are rejected under the same rationale. Note: non-transitory, computer-readable medium claims are obvious over method claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUT WONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1123. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-6pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Abdullah Al Kawsar can be reached at 5712703169. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LUT WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2127
Prosecution Insights